Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

At 12/16/2014 6:46:27 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

The majority of biblical historians have done exactly that.The vast majority of biblical scholars agree that there are only two historical accounts that can be believed almost without question.His baptism and his death.There simply is no consensus on anything else.

No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always convinced that it says what he means.
George Bernard Shaw

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

Pretty much the only facts that are agreed upon by the majority of scholars is Jesus's Crucifixion and Baptism. That's it. Which doesn't tell us a whole lot about Jesus even assuming he existed.

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.

Here's the problem of using the majority opinion of NT Scholars:1. Most NT Scholars are actually theologians, who have a significant prior commitment to some facts about Jesus. It's virtually impossible to be a christian theologian if you do not believe in Jesus' resurrection. Thus unlike with other fields, this fact is seriously compromised by the lack of impartiality.

Our only half-decent evidence for the empty tomb is in the Gospel of Mark, which ends abruptly after it was discovered (it is thought there is a missing page from the original composition which explains why it ended abruptly). The problem with he Gospel of Mark is that it is plagued with contamination with supernatural events, which according to Stephen Law's contamination principle argument seriously discredits the mundane fact's authenticity, the empty tomb being one of them. It's arguable whether this was actually even a mundane fact.

Moreover the author of Mark wrote extensively from oral traditions and made stuff of his own up, quite bluntly (Sea of Galilee!). Thus even if the empty tomb really did happen, the evidence we have is hardly sufficient to demonstrate it to any reasonable degree of confidence.

2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb

As reported by one author. If one author reports of many witnesses, we don't have many witnesses, we have just one witness. Anyone can claim a multitude of witnesses, it doesn't provide evidence there really were any. Apparently according to Mark thousands of people saw Jesus' exorcisms, miracles, etc. etc. That doesn't go any way in demonstrating there really were thousands of such witnesses. He also claims several times scribes saw the events, yet we have no independent manuscripts from scribes that did witness them.

3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

Clarify what you mean by disciple. Because according to Paul, a disciple to him was someone who has met Jesus spiritually, and thus there were hundreds of disciples (according to Paul).

Again, this is all reported by just one author, from which was either made up by him, or derived from oral traditions. And we already know how capricious at best those are.

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

1. I am rather agnostic about these 'facts' being facts at all2. Assuming these facts to be true, then fair enough. We have an empty tomb, and lots of people having revelations of Jesus (Paul described as much anyway, as virtually everything he knew about Jesus was via. revelation). A rather curious set of facts, I would presume that the explanation is the same as virtually all the other mass hallucinations that have occurred in the past. A combination of culture, self-fulfilment, and stories and hysteria/excitement.

That's my guess at least, it's in line with what we already know happened in history.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.

In other words, his body was removed from the tomb, in order to create stories just like this one...

2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb

Yeah, that one is pure bs.

3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

Or, the simple biological reason that the dead stay dead.

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

They were explained, easily and without the need for magic.

Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
There would be peace if you obeyed us.~Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references. Putting the very real prospect of forgery aside, all you have is confirmation that Christians existed at the turn of the first century and they believed certain things. It's still all hearsay. You have nothing.

Let me help you. Nothing you have mentioned so far is in any way convincing. If that's all there was, the Jesus story would be dead already. The only thing keeping Jesus alive is the Pauline writings. That's where the current battleground is. If you want to focus your efforts, focus them there. However, even Paul never met Jesus even though they lived contemporaneously and he barely knows anything about him as a human being.

Fatihah: It's like your mother making spaghetti and after you taste it and don't like it, you say "well my mom must not exist". Not because their is no logical evidence but because she doesn't do what you want.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

Those 3 facts do not matter, when bodily resurrection after 3 days is proven to be impossible. So the explanation for those facts could very well be unknown, but bodily resurrection is not even on the field of play for possible explanations.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

What i love is christians will go on an claim that we need ot explain these facts.. Yet completely ignore the fact that the majority of mainstream scholars have concluded, since Albert Schweitzer did in 1906, in his book The Quest of the Historical Jesus, that Jesus was a failed apocalyptic preacher. He preached the law and and of a end times coming in his lifetime. He was killed as a common criminal and probably had a brother named James. He was believed to perform miracles, as were many in his time.

Why is it that you want us to accept your facts, when you don't accept the research being done yourself, is it just certain facts you want us to accept?

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

Here is one rule about history:If someone claims to know for certainty an event in the past (especially the ill-preserved past) then they are a fool.

Also, while the consensus is a good tool to establish a belief if you are ignorant on the subject, when you evaluate the evidence and reach a different conclusion, the consensus means nothing. The evidence does.

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.

This is an event in which there is no evidence. I also have personally met a few New Testament historians that do not believe that the Gospels are accurate in any way, that they are meta-parables and/or works of euhemerization.

2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb

There is no evidence for this. Jesus supposedly appeared to 500 people at once, and yet there is only one document that says this happened, and it was written by a believer. In fact, who says that this would even prove a historical Jesus? As Richard Carrier says, the original Jesus was a celestial Jesus that was killed by Satan and his minions. After that death Jesus appeared to others (like Paul) through revelation and revelation alone.

3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

Again, no evidence of this. What evidence is there that the disciples existed.

All you are doing is looking at the NT and claiming that certain parts are true. If 90% of a document is false and the reliability of the other 10% is uncertain, to claim it as truth is a foolish thing to do.

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

Because we are skeptical and realize these arguments of yours do not hold any water.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

1) Someone could have moved the body.2) Grief makes people see/hear/otherwise experience things they normally wouldn't.3) Jesus had already led folks to believe that someone could be resurrected (Lazarus), so combining that with #2 would probably lead devout folks to think it had happened again.

Each of those, and all of them together, seem much more plausible to me than that Jesus (if he actually existed) was a god in human form.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

If only facts could be decided by a majority then we could all be living on a flat Earth and everything would be so much simpler.

When it's a majority who knows what they're talking about I will take their word on matters of history over popular level atheist authors.

Nah, they're basing their opinions on the same texts we all have access to. Hearsay accounts written decades after the alleged events by persons unknown. You can't get facts out of such material, only educated guesses. Most of the consensus you refer to is built on a long history of traditional beliefs and this has its own inertia. Although there have been Jesus mythicists over the last couple of centuries, it's only in the last few decades that really serious concerted attempts have been made to debunk the myth. There's not much authentic left of the jesus story now (which is why you only hsve a few 'facts'). Give it another hundred years, you won't have a majority any more. That's a prophecy.

Until history deniers such as yourself and the various pseuds you've alluded to actually have the testicular fortitude to debunk Josephus' accounts, Tacitus' accounts, etc. your Jesus denial theory will be on the backburner of academic research.

Accounts? You should be embarrassed to even mention these scant, fleeting references.

At 12/16/2014 6:03:08 AM, IEnglishman wrote:Most New Testament historians say that there are three statements which can be taken as almost historically certain about Jesus of Nazareth's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate;

Here is one rule about history:If someone claims to know for certainty an event in the past (especially the ill-preserved past) then they are a fool.

That is why I said "almost certain". Keep up champ.

Also, while the consensus is a good tool to establish a belief if you are ignorant on the subject, when you evaluate the evidence and reach a different conclusion, the consensus means nothing. The evidence does.

The evidence is in the Gospels, you offer no refutation of them, yet believe Jesus wasn't even a figure of history, despite his coverage throughout hundreds of documents in the New Testament alone.

1) Jesus' tomb was found empty on Sunday morning by a group of his women followers. According to Jakob Kramer, an Austrian specialist in New Testament history, the overwhelming majority of people who have studied the New Testament believe the Bible is accurate in saying Jesus' tomb was found empty that morning by his women followers.

This is an event in which there is no evidence. I also have personally met a few New Testament historians that do not believe that the Gospels are accurate in any way, that they are meta-parables and/or works of euhemerization.

That's not what the majority of people believe, though.

You can always find a token crank who believes in your grand Christian conspiracy to make up Jesus.

As long as the majority actually study HISTORY, those opinions are just that, and that's how they will remain, at least in academia.

2) On several separate occasions different people and groups of people (both believers and skeptics) had experiences of Jesus after the finding of the empty tomb

There is no evidence for this. Jesus supposedly appeared to 500 people at once, and yet there is only one document that says this happened, and it was written by a believer. In fact, who says that this would even prove a historical Jesus? As Richard Carrier says, the original Jesus was a celestial Jesus that was killed by Satan and his minions. After that death Jesus appeared to others (like Paul) through revelation and revelation alone.

Richard Carrier is an evangelical atheist who publishes with an evangelical atheist publishing house. Can you see any conflict of interests, here?

3) the original disciples came to believe in Jesus rising from the dead, despite having no reason to believe Jesus did resurrect and every reason to dismiss it, given that Jewish tradition dictates that people will not rise from the dead until the end of the world

Again, no evidence of this. What evidence is there that the disciples existed.

Roman records of them being tortured... Roman Emperors boasting of having them tortured... The same evidence there is for Caeser crossing the Rubicon. Your brain has been fogged by the evangelical crank figures of Carrier and Price so much that you don't even research what you say on this issue any more.

All you are doing is looking at the NT and claiming that certain parts are true. If 90% of a document is false and the reliability of the other 10% is uncertain, to claim it as truth is a foolish thing to do.

The NT is made of multiple documents. Since the death witnesses are different people than the life witnesses for Jesus, they are different and may be considered true regardless of whether you're a conspiracy-tard about other aspects of the gospels.

How do skeptics explain these three historical facts about Jesus? I am not trying to force anyone to accept a conclusion, but am asking out of sincere curiosity.

Because we are skeptical and realize these arguments of yours do not hold any water.

Or you just lap up the idea God doesn't exist from evangelical atheists for emotionally comforting reasons.